【Russia’s formidable delegation sets the agenda, not the stage for compromise】 The first day of U.S.-Ukraine-Russia negotiations yielded no substantive outcomes—directly attributable to the composition of Russia’s negotiating team, whose prominence is matched by professional expertise.
Six individuals represented Russia.
The lead negotiator is Presidential Assistant Mikhail Medvedev, a familiar figure.
He served as chief political coordinator during the 2022 Istanbul talks, previously held the position of cultural minister, and authored a textbook-style discourse advocating a hardline stance on historical legitimacy.
Medvedev is the architect behind the argument that Ukraine lacks historical legitimacy, asserting it as an artificially constructed state without a distinct nation, culture, or historical tradition. Ukrainian culture, in his view, is merely a regional variant of a shared Russian cultural heritage, and the Ukrainian language a dialect of Russian.
A significant portion of Putin’s narrative echoes Medvedev’s intellectual framework.
The Ukrainian team knows him well—and deeply distrusts him. As a seasoned expert on Ukraine, he presents a far more formidable challenge than figures like Lavrov.
His leadership signals a clear political intent: Russia intends to impose its will on Ukraine, even before substantive discussions begin.
The issue of national history cannot be avoided—and will not be.
Yet Medvedev holds no formal ministerial rank, which introduces a degree of flexibility. While the negotiation channel remains open, the keys reside in the Kremlin, with terms dictated by developments on the battlefield.
Two deputy foreign ministers also attended: Ryabkov, responsible for U.S. relations and arms control, making his debut in such high-level talks; and Galuzin, a veteran of affairs concerning the former Soviet republics—an expert on Ukraine and living archive of the region’s dynamics.
Additionally, Colonel General Kostyukov, head of the GRU’s intelligence and operations directorate, and Deputy Chief of the Main Operations Directorate, Dzharalovsky, bring direct military and operational knowledge. Should discussions turn to frontline coordinates, troop deployments, ceasefire lines, or territorial percentages, they are prepared to provide immediate input.
Komkov, director of the Foreign Intelligence and International Relations Department at the FSB, handles matters related to security and intelligence—a natural fit for his role.
Regardless of whether the talks produce results, the composition of Russia’s delegation demonstrates serious intent: military, intelligence, operational, and U.S.-related tracks are all represented. The agenda encompasses military, territorial, and European security issues in one comprehensive package.
The ability to maintain separate tracks—Ukrainian issues distinct from Russia-U.S. relations—is a hallmark of professional negotiation strategy.
What Ukraine fears most is being forced into piecemeal deals, especially when facing such a well-coordinated, multi-track opposition.
The absence of Lavrov and Peskov—figures who remain in the background, notably absent from the UAE meeting—suggests caution. Neither has signaled support for either a ceasefire or a truce, maintaining firm opposition to European participation in the process.
This elite, multidisciplinary delegation is designed to advance the agenda, not to facilitate concessions.
When Zelenskyy repeatedly expresses desire to speak directly with Putin, it may not be about formality, location, or security—it may simply reflect the need to first address the foundational questions posed by Medvedev.
Original article: toutiao.com/article/1881538276728912/
Disclaimer: This article reflects the personal views of the author